It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
That technology has limitations and some people don't understand those limitations. When a plane was sent up to confirm the cause of a UFO on radar over Washington DC, they found the source of the radar return, and it wasn't a UFO in the sky. Thermal inversion layers can reflect not only light but radar and that's apparently what happened when Washington DC had some unusual weather patterns:
originally posted by: AthlonSavage
Passive radar systems will give quantitative proof of Ufos in sky. The only way to prove Ufos exist is using effective technology such as this.
Among the witnesses who supported Samford's explanation was the crew of a B-25 bomber, which had been flying over Washington during the sightings of July 26–27. The bomber was vectored several times by National Airport over unknown targets on the airport's radarscopes, yet the crew could see nothing unusual. Finally, as a crew member related, "the radar had a target which turned out to be the Wilson Lines steamboat trip to Mount Vernon...the radar was sure as hell picking up the steamboat."
But the Steamboat wasn't an anomaly, it was a steamboat, and given a reflective inversion layer I'm not sure that even the improved software would filter that out, because how could it, if the radar is reflecting off of a real, moving object? You could put in a speed filter to filter out slower moving objects, but that would also filter out things like helicopters if they were just hovering, so that might not be such a good idea.
I wouldn't say they are useless. You can use them like in the Washington DC case where you get an unknown on radar, and vector a plane to make a visual ID on the object, which in the example above was a steamboat. In other cases it could be something else, but I think the visual confirmation of the object would be helpful. So I'm not arguing against using radar, and I don't think it's useless. I'm just saying it would be helpful to get some kind of confirmation of what the radar is telling you before you get too excited and think a steamboat is a UFO.
originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
I suppose as UFO detectors, radars are pretty useless.
Whether they can or not isn't the question. We know that the radar used in that case is not ground penetrating radar, so therefore data indicating underground "flight" from that radar must be erroneous. There are ground penetrating radar devices, but they have a significantly different design than the radar used for monitoring air traffic, and furthermore they are subject to even more limitations than air traffic radars. For example, some types of more conductive soils block their signals.
And who said alien craft cant fly underground?